The development commentary video could have been an Apple advertisement. We will embed it below, but it definitely had that whimsical tone we all know and groan. The Pixel was heavily focused on design and screen quality.

The display is quite small, just under 13”, but it has a higher resolution than professional-grade 30” monitors. It leapfrogs Catleap. When trying to visualize the use case, the first thought which comes to mind is a second PC for someone to take with them. If you can get a really high resolution experience with that, then bonus. Right?

The downside? The price starts at $1299 USD and goes up from there. You can get a larger SSD and LTE for just 150$ more, at the $1449 price point if you can wait until April.

Once you factor in the price, and a mighty big factor that is too, it makes it really difficult to figure out who Google is targeting. The only explanation which makes sense to me is a high-end laptop which is easy for IT departments to manage for executives and students.

Lastly, 4GB of RAM is ridiculously cheap nowadays. Could it have killed them to add in a little extra RAM to get more headroom? Also, what about the lack of connectivity to external displays? (Update: Sorry, just found mini displayport on the product tech specs.)

Chrome Browser is 32-bit of course, but since it launches each of its tabs as a separate process it could make use of as much RAM as it likes if the underlying (Linux) kernel can understand >4GB.

So long as each tab individually remains using less than 4GB.

It would make sense that they could have used a 32-bit Linux kernel, given ARM support and all, but this is not an OEM product. If it was an important product to Google they could have swung it. I mean, they probably needed to do some software updates to support the screen and high DPI.

Note: Chrome for "retina" iPad is not Chrome, it's Safari with a complicated skin.